Ah, the killstreak. A single idea that changed the face of multiplayer shooters. All these years later, has its time finally come? Is it time for the world to leave the killstreak behind?

The killstreak is a multiplayer game feature popularized by Call of Duty, but these days the concept turns up in other games as well. Basically, when a player manages to take out a certain number of enemies without dying, he or she is given a special ability that they can unleash at their discretion.

Maybe they get to fire up a drone that temporarily gives their team the ability to see enemies on the map, or maybe they build a powerful sentry gun to help fortify a position. Or unleash a pack of guard dogs, or even call in a tactical airstrike. The more kills, the better the reward... but if they die without using it, they have to start over.

Advertisement

Needless to say, killstreaks are controversial. Plenty of players don't like them, with common complaints being that they can upend a balanced match or unfairly reward the best players with even more power. Other players like them a lot, since hey, it's pretty fun to kill a bunch of your enemies and then drop a tactical airstrike on them.

Some new games are experimenting with new ways to approach killstreak-like ideas while getting away from the traditional way that killstreaks have been designed. (For example, Titanfall's burn cards seem like an interesting alternative.) Which brings us to today's query:

For the discussion below: What do you think of killstreaks? Is it time for a change? If you played the Titanfall beta, do you think something like the burn card approach works better? What are some other games that are doing interesting things with killstreak-like concepts?

Sound off below. I'm curious to see who comes down on which side, and why.